Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion Meridian - Systems BR Is the King OF HD.

" It's sad that there are two formats "

I actually also wanted just the one HD format released. However, if that one format had been Bluray we would probably be stuck with Mpeg2 because Sony says so and there was no competition.

I'm not a great believer in the more capacity=better argument. How many SD Dvds do you have that exploit the seamless branching capability of that format ? T2 ? Any others ? How many others provide the movie soundtrack on a seperate stream ? If its 25-30gb for the movie only I dread to think of what c*ap Sony and Fox and Disney will cram on the rest of the disc.

To be honest , I find the DRM aspects of Bluray just as disconcerting. Technically, as far as presentation of the movie goes , both formats are/can be equal therefore I cant see either dying unless they both do


~M~

Rudy, you more than many here should be crying out for HD. You have a projector that is truly capable of delivering stunning images and it deserves the best sources available. On a 132" screen all you are doing with SD is magnifying compression artefacts and noise...

For everybody:

The reason that many people feel that DVD produced today look so good is that they are heavily noise reduced at source (ie real image detail is removed). You are left with a smooth pastel-like image, which compresses easily, thus avoiding many MPEG2 artefacts, but with no real image detail.

For a comparison of HD vs SD images, take a look at this thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...554d33&t=730533&page=1&pp=30

And in particular note the shot with Orlando Bloom's breastplate for a un-subtle example of differences.

And also note that projector is not full 1080p capable and yet the differences are very clear. And that you are seeing these images are only a few inches wide on a compute monitor; imagine those differences as screen sizes get larger...

My current screen is 180" wide 2.35:1 scope ratio - perhaps this explains my fanaticism I'd rather believe that it is my 6 years of living with a 120" wide screen driven by a 12" CRT and viewing over 1000 DVDs on that screen as well as doing research into MPEG2 encoding and related artefacts...

Cheers,

Mark

With the newer codecs the bit-rate and storage advantages are nullified though. Of course you can always build an extreme case where HD-DVD doesn't have sufficient bit rate or storage by packing multiple lossless audio tracks or not putting features on a 3ish hour long feature on a 2nd disc that's still cheaper to manufacture than a BD-50.

Of course the vast majority of Blu-ray releases will continue to be BD-25s so there isn't really a storage advantage either.

Cheers,

True. However (and this is coming from a different angle than the codecs) say both HDDVD and BD manage to produce triple layer discs with 2x DVD layers + 1x HD layer. BD will have a big advantage.

We're some way off this of course (if we ever get there).

Im with Ian, I think we have said what we all think. Lets come back to this in a year and see what happens.

best regards,
Jerry

Anyone got a good hat they are prepared to eat?

Cheers, Chris

I have a chocolate one kept in the fridge ;
I'm usually wrong about everything so it's half eaten already; I'll gladly root to take another bite if HD disk makes it...
Here's hope 'n for a top-hat dinner...

ken

Well, anything more than 2 layers is out of spec for Blu-ray ROM for consumer playback. It's legal for computer storage only.

You also reach a point where it's really diminishing returns. Would a 3-4 layer BD be cheaper to produce than a 2+1 or 2+2 BD disc? Doubtful. So then there's little call for it.

What would require 75-100GB other than TV shows on disc?

I'm thinking real world apps here.

Cheers,

Ken, When the time comes, Lets do Lunch
Cheers, Chris

Its amazing how times change. A new format is released and some people dismiss what was once so wonderful as utter garbage. Does everyone forget how bad Laserdisc looked and DVD was so wonderful? My old projector looks better than those pictures with SD upsampled. Especially with video moving on the screen. Some of those artifacts and color noise is hard to see with moving video. Sure pause it and you can see it as you move frame by frame. Go to a movie with film and I see noise all the time. SD DVD is still a good format. Chris was correct and most people think the same IMO. HD movies is better but SD doesn't suck. It certantly didn't when it first came out and back then it had a lot of issues. Mpeg2 encoding was new back then and we were stuck with single layer DVD's. I have a 119" diagonal screen and sit 16 feet back from the screen. SD DVD still looks pretty darn good.

There are a lot of people that buy HDTV's or have HD cable installed and don't know how to use them. They end up watching 480p because they don't have the foggiest idea what any of this stuff means. Even the damn cable guys installing this stuff don't know what it is in a lot of cases. It's really sad. Setting up a display and resolutions and aspect ratios on the screen is like Physics to some people. That's the problem. I even see it in Best Buy sometimes. I say to the people I know who complain that they need to read and learn about it. They say why does it have to be so complicated? Then they get pissed and say they don't give a rat's ass about the technical stuff. They just want to put the disc in the player and push play. I see this and thats what tells me forget it these formats will not succeed. It's too bad I wish and hope they will. For now...SD DVD looks good enough for me and most people. I don't want to end up with another laserdisc player sitting in my rack. It's a sad fact about most common folk. They could care less about all these different resolutions, interlacing, progressive scan, overscan vs. pixel perfect, blah, blah, blah.

I guess I feel this way because I already went throught the Laserdisc age and then the DVDA age and just don't want to invest anymore in these formats that keep dying. I think thats why most of us feel we need to wait and see before we invest in one of these formats. If you feel you need it then fine.

Ron

Sorry, Ron, you can rationalise all you want, MPEG2 on SD DVD sucks. We are of course talking about technical performance, not subjective perception. If you choose to accept mediocrity that is of course your decision. You just need either to see HD vs SD to accept this or simply do some background reading on MPEG2 artefacts and then go watch some DVDs and all becomes clear. I appreciate that my stance sounds arrogant, but it is based on fact and not delusion.

As tired as you guys must be of me banging on about HD, I, quite frankly, am tired of the "SD Is good enough." chants and it's time for the gloves to come off.

Go look up subjects such as mosquito noise, i-frame pulsing, macro blocking, digital noise reduction, chroma noise, vertical filtering, etc and it doesn't take long to realise that what we have with SD DVD is an artificial mess. We have been given the opportunity to move on from that to transfers that are virtually transparent to the masters they come from. We should embrace that and not sit on the fence rationalising our decisions to accept mediocrity.

Cheers,

Mark

SD does look pretty good if you have nothing to compare it too. SD certainly is not bad. Most people watch contents of the film rather than analysing the technical merits of the compression techniques. Im long past the point that I sit close to the screen and tinker with the settings just to get it to look at its best. Joe public would largely not dream about doing this in the first place - often they don't even bother if they are connected via composite or RGB as long as they get a picture and it is better than VHS.

I hate to admit it that I have been part of the Freeview HD trial and have watched very little in HD simply because I would much rather watch something when I want to watch it rather than watching something in better quality at a specific time. Don't get me wrong, I can tell the difference, but at my normal viewing distance HD is not the huge leap that transition from 405 line b&w to 625 line colour was.

Obviously people will watch under different viewing conditions, but I would expect that mine are fairly typical for Joe public in that the TV does not dominate the room and I am not watching in a home cinema or stuck my nose so close to the TV that I am watching in iMax.

Thankfully I will not be looking up those topics so I can still enjoy my SD without my viewing enjoyment being ruined by worrying about the technical aspects.

No amount of HD vision in my living room will transport me into the feature - its limited by my surroundings. HD may take me one or two rows further forward, but no further. Sound on the other hand is much easier - I can just close my eyes and I will be there with front row seats.